The statement “A journey is only defined by its eventual destination” could describe a spectator’s understanding of movement. In relation to immigration this statement could represent an observer’s common interpretation of an immigrant’s travels. Whether or not an immigrant moves with an intended destination, onlookers will often outline the journey in terms of relative location. In other words, despite the fact that many immigrants would view a journey as a process of moving, non-immigrants often view a journey as a series of events strictly bounded by two book ends: initial location and destination.
Rather than describing a journey in terms of progressive experiential shifts, people tend to focus on geographical or environmental shifts. As stated well in There's no Jose Here, “[I}mmigration is. . . . the hope of superando, of breaking new ground, building a better life for oneself and one’s children” (Garbriel Thompson, 41). In addition to demanding movement, immigration involves exposing oneself to unfamiliar terrain in the hope of receiving more opportunities or benefits. For an immigrant, immigration encompasses the whole process of transitioning from one culture to another, and constructing a new life. That is, the journey becomes defined by the act of crossing over cultural boundaries and reconstruction. The danger of framing a journey in terms of destination is the question 'what determines when the person has arrived?' The word ‘destination’ possesses final qualities that can prescript the meaning of a journey.
Consequently, when an immigrant settles in a new country, perhaps there exists the temptation to believe that one who has reached the final destination. Among the immigrants who consider, for example, America the place of their dreams, perhaps these foreigners impose meaning to their travels based upon where they have arrived. The immigrants define their journey within the perimeters of physical movement, which they believe is enough to change everything, despite the possibility that the journey has not actually ended. That is, perhaps there remains the struggle to establish oneself in such a competitive and economically unequal society. The problem of setting a destination is achieving the abstract sense of arrival.
Word Count: 346
Reference
Thompson, G. (2007). There's no José here: Following the hidden lives of Mexican immigrants. New York: Nation Books.
Login
1. Charles Jordan
Sam,
You willingness to "jump off the cliff" and take risks never ceases to amaze me. This is probably the best piece of writing you have composed yet. Also, it is quite possibly the best composition I have seen from any undergraduate I have taught. Now, let's see if I can't challenge you to move even further down the path of philosophical wisdom.
When you make this connection early on (a brilliant one) stating the differences in perspective between the immigrant and the non-immigrant, do you think this would be an interesting place to start making an argument about the nature of identity as a social construct? What social strata have the immigrants defined that allow their journey to seem more abstract and fluid versus the non-immigrant who is confined by the order and customs of their native land?
Next, when you state that the term "destination" can act as the determining factor in the value or quality of the journey, what about the "signifiers" in the journey lead to a skewed "signified" for those who are immigrants and those who are non-immigrants. My challenge to you is to head to the internet, look up Saussure's semiotic theory and try to start differentiating between the ______ which is the signifier and the _____ which is the signified. This is tricky. But, go, get lost in Saussure, you will love him.
Wonderful, wonderful, wonderful job.
CJ
04/07/13, 03:57 am